para504

Same problem here, but AMD setup. Past month or so its been pretty bad & spotty lag. FPS performance as taken a serious hit as well, with settings that have been used for the past year+. Multiple maps, on standard DCS build as well as the MT version. Using flat screen. 5900x 7900 XTX 64GB RAM SSD for DCS, OS, Saved Games

EDIT: Solved with same solution from this post: Hi, What the OP described is happening to me. I have the base NS430 and several 3D aircraft specific showing as owned and installed in the module manager as well as can be found in the mods/aircraft folder. The NS430 is NOT showing up as an icon in the Options/Special area. They were turned off in the Module Manager (deliberately a long time ago), but I just re-enabled & re-installed them. Since re-enabling it, I've done a DCS cleanup & repair and have run in it both standard and MT versions with the same issue. I'm not sure if something got "remarked out" possibly on the Saved Games side or other thoughts on resetting this? EDIT - Solved, see top of entry

The reason why ED should "care" is because a map (especially a redundant one that breaks existing content with missions and campaigns) is a reflection on ED's ecosystem. Players will be looking to ED for answers, not Ugra... The design decisions have an impact on the broader community, for both single and multi-player environments. The Normandy 2 enhancement is a wonderful idea, but not if breaks more than it fixes. I'm saying this as a long time DCS supporter, an avid Warbird fan, and I appreciate the continued investment. I just don't want to see a potential win with enhanced Normandy and see it turn sour.

I love the idea of an enhanced Normandy map experience, provided its "additive"/enhancement to original and not a separate map. I'd buy that product in a heart beat. That is, existing missions and campaigns work, and owners of original and Normandy 2 can co-exist on missions in multi-player (similar to Supercarrier). Unfortunately with a separate map approach it divides the community, will be a LOT of confusion for what missions work or won't. Many of us have already invested in Normandy 1, including mission/campaign developers - I seriously doubt many of us have the desire to duplicate that for a redundant map. The separate map approach seems like it takes a great concept and turns it into something negative for the DCS community (the negative results outweigh the good). I applaud the developers for enhancing the experience and thrilled to see continued investment in WWII era, but the separate map approach is not the way to go.

This is great & thank you for sharing it. Really look forward to Pacific theater in DCS... Out of curiosity is it feasible to use the Yak-52 FM with the cockpit & armament of choice (say the P-51 as it done here) ? Asking as I have no clue...

+1... Please remove the static reflections!

Do you recall which mod? I'm experiencing the same invisible tanks/bombs, and I have suppressed Spitfire related mods (that I know of), as well as repaired DCS... ETA: Appears to be tied to a WWII ship mod...

Great write up, and very annoying bug. Does ED have a status on a fix?

Same X-axis issues here on a gen-2 gunfighter. Have already serviced it several times. I’m on my 2nd x-axis board btw (1st one had same symptoms getting more frequent and severe until it wouldn’t work anymore). VKB guys were good about helping and replacing it when needed, but it is annoying reoccurring issue.

see the same nav lights glow during dim light, all power off to aircraft.

I've noticed the same in SP missions

I was getting Mission load freezes, and it seems for me to be tied to some older Mod's I had (older user created WWII planes). Was working fine before the 2.5.5 patch, but had to remove old mod's to get it to load. Hope this may help some folks; something to check anyway.

Yes, its been happening frequently again... Hangs up on Exit mission. In Beta version; I've been using FW 190 A-8 on Normandy map, but have seen it in other modules as well. Performed repair, using current graphics drivers (NVidia) without change to the problem.

I agree, the UH-1 is a module I really enjoy, but it has some irritating fixes that are long overdue. We shouldn't have to pay for break-fixes, but I would be very interested in continuing to invest in future helo's, provided I see support for the existing ones... I completely understand its a balancing act of resources, revenue vs maintenance, etc. but the bugs are really over-due for a fix.

Many thanks Baltic Dragon!